Investigation Report Summary – Section 69 – Founded – Department of Health – Fraud – Authenticity of university degree

Section 69 – Founded – Fraud – Authenticity of university degree

Authority: This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act , S.C. 2003, c. 22, ss. 12 and 13 (the “Act”).

Issue: The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether the candidate committed fraud in an external appointment process by submitting a post-secondary degree that was not authentic.

Facts: Note: Any use of personal pronouns (e.g “his”, “her”, “she”, “he”, etc.) should be considered gender neutral and not indicative of the gender of the individual described.

The candidate applied to an external appointment process at a certain group and level. The education requirements for the position were a Bachelor's degree from a recognized university or a combination of a post-secondary diploma in addition to other schooling or training in a specific discipline. The candidate under investigation was appointed in September 2009. At that time, the candidate was deemed to have met the education requirements of the position, based upon a foreign Bachelor's degree in the discipline. The collective agreement for the occupational group also entitled the candidate to an educational allowance upon appointment. The candidate also held a college diploma in the discipline.

The candidate later applied to an external appointment process at a higher level. While reviewing documentation for this process, the department discovered that their internal files contained no Canadian academic equivalency for the candidate's university degree. In the interim, the candidate withdrew from the higher level process. Notwithstanding, the department pursued the matter since a university degree was a requirement of the position that the candidate held. Consequently, the department wrote to the individual about the oversight in the file and advised her to obtain the Canadian educational equivalency through an accredited evaluation service. The department arranged, with the individual's permission, to have the university degree evaluated for equivalency purposes. The individual then advised the department to inform the evaluation service that they could be required to contact the foreign university for additional information, since the awarded degree no longer existed. Furthermore, the individual indicated that she was willing to be deployed to a lower-level position that did not require a Bachelor's degree. The evaluation service later informed the department that the university had confirmed that the individual's university degree was not authentic and therefore could not be evaluated for an equivalency. The university informed the individual of their conclusions and requested that the person refrain from future assertions of graduation from their institution and that any documents related to the graduation be destroyed. In November 2010, the individual resigned from the federal public service.

The evidence demonstrated several concerns about the individual's actions regarding the degree and the credibility of the testimony. Information about how the candidate obtained the degree was vague. When the authenticity of the degree was challenged, the individual took little action to prove to the university or to the department that a university degree had been obtained and, ultimately, a resignation from the public service was tendered. The evidence demonstrated that the person wanted to enroll in courses at the university, not to obtain a degree, but because the courses would assist with the attaining of an occupational certification from a professional association.

The person also communicated with other institutions to ensure that the university's conclusions would not negatively affect her other academic or professional standings. On two occasions, requests were made to the department, by the individual, asking for placement in lower-level positions that did not require a degree. These requests suggested that the person understood the different academic requirements of the occupational levels. The individual testified to using the degree only once, at the time of application, for the original level process. However, individuals appointed to positions in this occupational group are entitled to an educational allowance. One could reasonably conclude that there was an intention to deceive the department by indicating that a university degree had been obtained, at the time of application, in order to qualify for the promotion and receive the allowance.

Conclusions: Further to the investigation conducted under section 69 of the Act, the evidence demonstrated that on the balance of probabilities, the candidate committed fraud by submitting a university degree that was not authentic.

Corrective actions: The Commission ordered that:

• For a period of three years from the signing of the Record of Decision, the candidate obtain the Commission's written approval before accepting any position or work within the federal public service;
• Should the candidate accept a term, acting or indeterminate appointment within the federal public service without having first obtained such an approval, the appointment will be revoked;
• Should the candidate obtain work through casual employment, temporary help agencies or student programs within the federal public service without having first obtained such an approval, a letter and a copy of the Investigation Report and Record of Decision will be sent to the deputy head, advising of the fraud committed by the candidate; and
• The Royal Canadian Mounted Police be provided with a copy of the Investigation Report and any relevant information for the purpose of section 133 of the PSEA.

In addition, the Commission recommended to the department that it recover any education allowance paid to the candidate.

File number: 11-12-05